Downloadable balance patches?

[Problem2]

I hope they do... Look at it this way...

Yugioh has two different ban and limited card lists. One for traditional players, which just limits cards, and doesn't ban any, and advanced, which bans any card that has been found to make very easy to pull off ,game ending moves... these lists are updated every 1-3 monthes.

This allows for new decks to be tried out, new strategies to be learned by all who want to compete, and to create a somewhat more level playing field. Now apply that to smash...

These patches would have the potential the make drastic changes in the teir list, giving more characters their time to shine (bad bad pun) If you want to play competitivly, you'll have to learn and adapt, a new and different way to prove your skill, and if you are someone who just loves your character, you just have to accept that their abilities might be changed, but why do care? You'll play them no matter what...right?

And I think it is only fair, I mean if we're looking at a roster of 35-40, half of them better be worth competitve play at any given moment...

They don't modify the card effects though. If they patch the game, they're not going to "ban" characters or moves, they're going to modify them to a more fair state. That makes a big difference.

 

[hectichobo]

May i ask what a patch and a tier are && for online connectivity for a Wii can u just use wireless internet... or do u need to hook something up to it... someone plz explain

 

[Hong]

May i ask what a patch and a tier are && for online connectivity for a Wii can u just use wireless internet... or do u need to hook something up to it... someone plz explain

Patches in this case are electronic updates to digital media which fix, add or remove content from devices or in this case video games.

Tier list is what people think about who's the better character in a one on one scenario.
http://www.smashwiki.com/wiki/Tier_list

You can connect in one of three ways

• Wireless Router
• Nintendo USB WiFi Adapter
• Wii Lan Adapter

The latter two are sold in most stores with Nintendo merchadise.

 

[KratosAurion192]

They don't modify the card effects though. If they patch the game, they're not going to "ban" characters or moves, they're going to modify them to a more fair state. That makes a big difference.

Actually they do change the card effects sometimes...

And both ways do the same thing which was my point, change things up. Changing how moves react every three or four monthes will allow time to experience the changes and get used to them, and even allow strategies to form from them, and then gives you a new chance to find out something new.

 

[Fawriel]

I'm starting to think again that balance patches might be necessary. If you haven't seen the new update yet... check it out.

Sakurai seems to try to implement as many unique mechanisms into the game as he possibly can. With so many COMPLETELY different styles, something is bound to end up completely unusable or completely broken on the professional level.
It looks like we're looking at a whole variety of Zelda/Sheiks and Icies.

 

[S_B]

I'm starting to think again that balance patches might be necessary. If you haven't seen the new update yet... check it out.

Sakurai seems to try to implement as many unique mechanisms into the game as he possibly can. With so many COMPLETELY different styles, something is bound to end up completely unusable or completely broken on the professional level.
It looks like we're looking at a whole variety of Zelda/Sheiks and Icies.

I agree.

And I still don't see why people believe that rock-solid, cold-hard DATA wouldn't be usable here.

Let's review some common concerns:

"Data will be inaccurate because people will always play their favorite characters."

Not true, and I'll cite Mario Strikers as an example, specifically with the Hammer Bros. who have an awesome deke (defensive move) and a charge shot which is a guaranteed goal.

Does anyone honestly think that players chose to use the Hammer Bros. because they like them as a character, or because their charge shot is awesome? Online games are extremely competitive, and I'm willing to bet that after 2-3 matches where a player was beaten on the merit of the Hammer Bros. alone, they probably started adding one to their roster themselves.

The same is true with SSBM. How many players probably started playing with Bowser, Ness, Yoshi, etc., then got their a$$es handed to them enough times by a higher-tiered character that they decided to switch to that character?

"Data will be inaccurate because people won't take online play seriously and won't play as the best known characters."

Umm, no. Just no.

Aside from the fact that years of online PC gaming have proven this to be 100% incorrect, you can see the same trend in MP: Hunters and Mario Strikers where players will use the characters requiring the lowest amount of skill with the highest win return possible.

People love to win and hate to lose. This is irrefutable. Suggesting that the same will not be true for online SSBB is ridiculous.

For this reason, the tournament data of Melee will be outclassed by the online data of Brawl.

Tournament data shows the best possible characters because people will do everything they can to win. Online will be the EXACT same story, except that it will be happening all the time instead of during tournaments which don't happen nearly as often so tier data acquisition will be far more rapid than it is with tournaments.

"Online match data won't allow Sakurai to determine anything about the game or its balance."

Au contraire. Data will allow Sakurai and Sora to know EVERYTHING about how the game is balanced because, unlike whiny players, statistics don't lie in an attempt to get their main buffed.

If the game is balanced, and I mean TRULY balanced, then statistics will show that every character's win/loss and use % numbers will be within +/-10% of each other.

After a year of data, I have NO doubt that it will be easy to see which characters are pulling ahead of the pack and which ones are falling horribly behind.

Again, NO amount of players trying to play as their favorite character will offset this data. Do you think Marth was anyone's favorite character? He's from Fire Emblem 1 which cannot even be played in english. How could ANY english speaker possibly favor him for any reason other than his tier placement?

Online games will be played to win, and they'll probably be 1v1 matches to boot, meaning that Sakurai will be able to see right away how characters match up against each other.

When you have a recorded 1,000,000 fights between two specific characters, say Bowser vs. Ike, and Ike wins 75% of those fights to Bowser's 25%, then you quite clearly know that something is amiss with Bowser.

The law of averages dictates that, if these are two balanced characters, then their win/loss percentages should be within 5% of each other. Any strong deviation in favor of one character or another indicates that there is a problem.

Now, you're probably saying, "What if Ike just pwns Bowser?" Fair enough, but what if Ike's win/loss ratio with every other character is just as lopsided? Or what if Bowser is getting his arse kicked with a similar average win ratio of 25%?

Then Sakurai has some useful data. If characters are balanced, then their win/loss ratios will be balanced. If they are not functioning correctly, then it can one again be seen in their win/loss ratios and corrected accordingly through online patches.

 

[Fawriel]

I agree!

It's true that many people don't play to win and just like having a good time.
But that is only really possible if you're sitting in a room with friends talking and making jokes in the mean time.
If you play against a random person online, you will want to win, period. And even if you are super-dedicated and love your low-tier friend, the first hundred n00bs laughing at you and calling you a n00b will make you only use your favourite character in a match against a friend.

Of course, we don't know whether there will be random battles or friend-code battles or both. But if my theory is true ( which it is ), then the weaker but lovable characters will find their most common usage in friendly matches with your buds. Random matches, which will probably be far more common, will be dominated by those who dominate, there's no way around that.

 

[S_B]

Random matches, which will probably be far more common, will be dominated by those who dominate, there's no way around that.

Exactly the case.

Implying that people won't play to win in SSBB online is implying that there are somehow people who LIKE to lose. If it means choosing a different character than their "favorite" in order to win, I'm sure they'll have no issue with that.

I honestly expect that, after playing some online SSBB and finding I lose to _____ no matter which character I use, I'll probably give _____ a try.

 

[S_B]

Tier list is what people think about who's the better character in a one on one scenario.
http://www.smashwiki.com/wiki/Tier_list

The tier list is formed via tournament data.

It's pretty safe to assume that, if a particular character is capable of being the best, then someone will have brought them that far, like Ken did with Marth.

As for tiers, I suspect that online play will generate tiers much, much faster than tournaments will because people will have competitive play at a far greater rate.

Man, I hope to god there IS online play in Brawl. The fact that we haven't heard anything about it lately is worrying me. The idea that I can play against my friends in good fun, then take my main online for some serious competition is enough for a fanboygasm of epic proportions...

 

[Takalth]

As for tiers, I suspect that online play will generate tiers much, much faster than tournaments will because people will have competitive play at a far greater rate.

Online play will actually create a false tier list. It's one of the objections I raised to patching earlier in this thread.

The tier list represents maximum reasonable potential of a character with no consideration for their learning curve. Online games (with a few rare exceptions) are made up about 60-80% of people who expect to win with a rudimentary skill level. They'll learn any technique that is easy, ignore those that are difficult, and expect to win.

If Melee was online, I can guarantee that Link would be a heck of a lot higher in the win rankings than he is in the tier list, because his UP+B is death on noobs. People who can't exploit lag and always try to roll behind their oppoent get creamed by this.

I have been into and followed online games before, and the winning characters/factions are generally those with easy and effective tricks (even if those tricks are counterable by a good player) rather than those with great skill potential. In a game like Smash, which appeals a lot more to the casual player than most online competitive games, this issue will be much larger.

 

[Fawriel]

Well, it would still have meant the death of the powers of Sheik and Marth, for instance.
Although you do raise a valid point.
However, over time, the competitiveness of online play in general is bound to increase faster than it did for Melee. Many n00bs will randomly end up facing a good player of an uber character like Fox and feel like they first saw "Shined Blind" -> "HOLY **** THATS POSSIBLE?!!?" Then they'll want to learn how to use that character probably.
Also, advanced techs will be distributed faster, people will learn from each other, and at some point, there'll be more people who play certain characters that were recommended to them while others become neglected.

But...
Yeah.
Your point is still valid. Link is like teh broken and stuffs.

 

[S_B]

If Melee was online, I can guarantee that Link would be a heck of a lot higher in the win rankings than he is in the tier list...

...Until enough Link players get pounded by enough Fox players and gravitate towards Fox, sure.

That's the beauty of doing it only once per year: after that much time, you should have some usable data because players will have generally found the path of least resistance.

Initially, yes, Link's numbers will be higher, but after a sufficient data period, they'll shy away from Link in favor of a faster character with a better chance of winning.

You have to remember that it was a desire to win that likely brought most of these players to Link in the first place, either because they played as him and then tried his up+B or were on the receiving end of it enough times.

Games always start this way: players find "that move" which seems to pwn everything, until someone finds a strategy to counter it, and so forth and so on.

If there was any kind of online system with ranking in SSBM (which is intended to match you against even-skilled players, like in Strikers), then I expect that you'd get away with Link's up+B until you earned about 100 pts, at which point you'd hit a solid wall of Fox players who would eat your lunch if you tried to do that.

This is just like how the Hammer Bros. trick in Strikers would work for about 100 pts and then you'd start facing the seasoned players who know how to counter it too easily.

 

[Takalth]

Games always start this way: players find "that move" which seems to pwn everything, until someone finds a strategy to counter it, and so forth and so on.

The problem is that system only works when the countering is easy. Most people don't put real effort into mastering the game, and if it takes decent skill to counter something, rather than just a standard, repeatable technique (in the case of link's up+b, you have to mindgame the move out of him) too many people won't bother learning to do it.

Sure, the top of the ladder will reflect the tier list, but that's a few percent of the people. The overall win-loss ratio will still reflect learning curve first and maximum potential second, whether the game has been out for 3 months or 10 years.

 

[S_B]

The overall win-loss ratio will still reflect learning curve first and maximum potential second, whether the game has been out for 3 months or 10 years.

Not the case.

SSBM experienced a strong sale surge up until around 4-5 million units, at which point sales tapered off to a slower pace.

Given that only 1 of 5 players who buy the game will likely go online, that doesn't give a strong enough influx of Link cheapness to offset the data to the point where the maximum potential won't show.

There will be fewer people on the learning curve and far more at maximum potential, it just takes time to get there, but they WILL arrive eventually.

That said, I maintain that once enough Link players get pwned by enough Fox players, they'll switch.

The ranking system forces players to fight against players who have a similar win/loss ratio to them. That's its primary function. Once these Link players use their cheap tactics often enough that they'll earn undeserved rank, they'll be fed to the Foxes and will quickly receive a rude awakening where they'll either:

1. Stop playing.

2. Switch characters.

I'm quite certain that this is the inevitable path all players took, it just didn't happen as quickly. All current tournament champs at one point or another had a favorite character who they loved but had to give them up when they discovered that the character couldn't compete in the metagame.

I understand what you're saying, but online gaming is always a trickle-down scenario: the people at the top come upon something and the people at the bottom gradually pick up on it until the people at the top find something new or they find the proverbial "end" of the maximum potential of the game.

 

[Frogla]

well some people like me think the alternate if everyone is using metaknight ill go with someone else. Pokemon TRAINER FTW though. thats my main

 

[S_B]

well some people like me think the alternate if everyone is using metaknight ill go with someone else. Pokemon TRAINER FTW though. thats my main

I feel that way too, as I pride myself on Bowser skill, but how many times could you stare at the winning screen of your online opponent before you said, "To hell with it!" How many times would you watch your main go flying into the distance while Falco stood on the stage doing his taunt with four lives left out of 5?

The point is, you shouldn't HAVE to do that for any other reason than you lack the skill, and this is why I think balance patches are an excellent idea.

You should be able to play with your main without knowing at the back of your mind that your main is gimped and is statistically either out of favor or outright abhorred.

Let's be honest: if I were to play online with Bowser under Melee's current status, I might as well just put the controller down every time I came up against a Fox/Falco player so they'd have an easier time wave shining me to the edge and spiking me. They'd probably even be able to do it quicker than Bowser could run so it would save time if I just let them do it.

 

[Frogla]

I feel that way too, as I pride myself on Bowser skill, but how many times could you stare at the winning screen of your online opponent before you said, "To hell with it!" How many times would you watch your main go flying into the distance while Falco stood on the stage doing his taunt with four lives left out of 5?

The point is, you shouldn't HAVE to do that for any other reason than you lack the skill, and this is why I think balance patches are an excellent idea.

You should be able to play with your main without knowing at the back of your mind that your main is gimped and is statistically either out of favor or outright abhorred.

fair statment, but statistic's really dont matter. Its all about skill IMO, I mean Pros can tell you what they think are the best charachters. But if you can use your Mewtwo better than you can learn to Fox i say go with Mewtwo.

"You know by the laws of physics a bumble bee shouldn't fly. Too bad a Bumblebee cant read a physics book".

I see that a balance patch would be usefull and im not really debating that, I actually would love patches or any downloadable content. But i am saying that even if i suck im going to stick to metaknight or PKMN Trainer because they are fun to play as. If i lose that just is a tell that i need to improve. A Mewtwo can beat a Marth its just all about will and training in my opinion.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

But if you can use your Mewtwo better than you can learn to Fox i say go with Mewtwo.

A Mewtwo can beat a Marth its just all about will and training in my opinion.

You really need to play at a higher level to understand why characters like Mewtwo have no chance. Take Taj, for example. He plays one of the most legendary Mewtwo's on the planet. Just watch his Shadowclaw videos to see. However, he never competes with him unless he knows he is playing a n00b. Taj plays with Fox, Falco, Sheik, and Captain Falcon.

I agree that will power can take you a long way. Taj can do amazing things with Mewtwo and combo the crap out of top tier opponents, but it only goes so far. Through close analysis, it can be confirmed that characters like Mewtwo simply lack the ability to keep up with a perfectly technical Fox/Falco. Obviously, no one plays perfectly, but the top players come pretty dang close. Mewtwo has to be played perfectly whereas Fox can afford numerous mistakes and still come out on top.

 

[Frogla]

k buzz you got me, But brawl will be a totally different game. I mean waveshining is partly what made fox and falco. And sheik will probably be PKMN Trainerfed.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I feel that way too, as I pride myself on Bowser skill, but how many times could you stare at the winning screen of your online opponent before you said, "To hell with it!" How many times would you watch your main go flying into the distance while Falco stood on the stage doing his taunt with four lives left out of 5?

The point is, you shouldn't HAVE to do that for any other reason than you lack the skill, and this is why I think balance patches are an excellent idea.

You should be able to play with your main without knowing at the back of your mind that your main is gimped and is statistically either out of favor or outright abhorred.

Let's be honest: if I were to play online with Bowser under Melee's current status, I might as well just put the controller down every time I came up against a Fox/Falco player so they'd have an easier time wave shining me to the edge and spiking me. They'd probably even be able to do it quicker than Bowser could run so it would save time if I just let them do it.

The problem with that is, while your happy on the recieving end, they're unhappy with their character being nerfed. This could have a major impact on competative play because you'll basically have to remaster your character every time a patch comes out. It's fine to put a nerf on a character at the begining of the game, but just like you get tired of losing to higher teirs, those players will get tired of being on the recieving end of almost never ending changes (mostly nerfs.) It's better for a competative game like smash, where you pick a particular character to get good with, to be consistant with it's balance.

 

[S_B]

The problem with that is, while your happy on the recieving end, they're unhappy with their character being nerfed.

I've said numerous times during this thread that I don't want to see any nerfs but to give buffs to lower level characters like Mewtwo and Bowser so they can compete at higher tiers.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

I've said numerous times during this thread that I don't want to see any nerfs but to give buffs to lower level characters like Mewtwo and Bowser so they can compete at higher tiers.

I do agree, but there are instances when nerfing is a better solution. Notice how Fox, Falco, Sheik, and Marth win most of Melee tournaments these days? They each have a couple moves that could be nerfed to bring the rest of the cast up to par. Being careful not to overdo it is the tricky part. Otherwise, yes, enhancing lower tier characters is definitely a better solution.

 

[FauxShaux]

I see it this way. I understand the fear of changing characters so that playing styles players develop are ruined, but if a character is low tier, and because of the competition of online play also not often used, what would it hurt to tweak the character? I understand that people play certain characters for reasons more than how well they play in-game, but then again wouldn't those same people enjoy seeing their characters get better? I think that balancing should only be done to make the characters that are rarely seen online more useful, and should stop at that.

 

[KratosAurion192]

Wow I love how my main was just like slapped around in this discussion for a while... sorry I just had to put that out there...

Nerf some...buff some... I don't care what they do as long as the space animals arn't on top for the entire existance of Brawl... I just want as much balance as possible. Like I said, if there is going to be 35-40 characters, most of them better be tournament worthy...

 

[RyokoYaksa]

Some characters in Melee are so ridiculously overpowered that they are in fact deserving of nerfing. You'd have to give lower tier characters equal insanity to actually make them able to compete with the top. Straight buffing left and right of everyone else will turn out to be a mess of overpower, which in the long run is actually harder to keep balance in.

 

[Tallgeese*]

Balance patches would own, although it would suck seeing your favourite character suddenly lose their best ability.

 

[psicicle]

I tend to choose characters based on how well I can use them, and so far I've gotten lucky with ice climbers and ganon. I decided to try playing fox because he was top tier but I'm just not a fox player and I can do much better with mice climbers.

Anyway, if there are any patches nerfing or making stuff stronger, hopefully they will be for kill moves because changing character combos is something that I don't think anyone wants.

 

[Mandalore]

I don't think that there should be balance patches. I like my characters as they are. Even if Mewtwo dies too quickly.

 

[Takalth]

Not the case.

I won't bother quoting the whole post.

Anyway, the difficulty with this discussion is that we have no reference point. Competitive games which receive patches have followed the pattern that I described (at least in my experience. I can't say that I've played every competitive game online), but they also tended to receive patches every few months or even more often, while most pro-patch people on Smashboards want them about once per year.

Would the once per year thing be sufficient to offset the normal pattern? Hard call. I lean toward "no," but as I said, I can't reference anything that has received balance patches that rarely (except when the patching team is small and low-budget, and I don't think that makes a good comparison model, either). If you know of one, mention it. Otherwise, this discussion is really a matter of a "yes" or "no" to the first question in this paragraph.

 

[S_B]

Anyway, the difficulty with this discussion is that we have no reference point. Competitive games which receive patches have followed the pattern that I described (at least in my experience. I can't say that I've played every competitive game online), but they also tended to receive patches every few months or even more often, while most pro-patch people on Smashboards want them about once per year.

I stand by my point about the majority of players being at maximum potential after 1-2 years. At that time, everyone who was going to buy SSBB will have bought it with the exception of the trickle of 20k sales per week. These players will have played online for a substantial amount of time and truly felt out the roster.

But you're right: I don't have a real world example of this happening online so I can't say how it would actually look in practice.

 

[Binx]

I think smash is too deep of a game for regular patching, it takes way to much time to come up with effective strategies to get nerf them on a regular basis. There is so much character diversity and so many tactics that there is probably a counter for every strategy in the game. There are 26 characters right now in the next one there will probably be around 40 characters, be definition half of them need to be below average and one of them will be the best, but this will take years to discover. Regular patching will not be very usefull for this type of game. Especially since its directed towards casual gamers more than competetive it makes it even more likely to not have regular patch times. There was talk of making it more balanced this time around though so lets just hope they tested well.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

this will take years to discover

But that's the beauty of it! Until the "best" characters are discovered, the game needs no patching. So, really, the game would be just fine without patches for a good year or two. However, look at the state of Melee. The tournament-worthy characters form an extremely small list. That game is extremely ripe for a patch. Brawl should be the same. If 20 different characters are winning tournaments then let the game live! If only 2 different characters are winning tournaments then a patch may be needed.

 

[S_B]

If 20 different characters are winning tournaments then let the game live! If only 2 different characters are winning tournaments then a patch may be needed.

That's all I'd really ask for, and it won't be long before online tournaments start happening regularly (probably with friend codes, but oh well).

I'd rather we get to see who can truly bring these characters to their fullest instead of seeing who can bring 1 of 5 characters to their fullest.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I don't know. I think that if you can truly "Master" a character in an in depth game like smash in less then one year then you're something else. I still haven't "Mastered" every aspect of Marth (who doesn't require that much technical skill to begin with) and I've been playing competatively for 2 years. I really think they should just do their best to balance the game from the begining and leave it at that. If you have maybe 10 characters winning tournaments and 15 or more of them getting by in a 40 character game then you should be praised. I'd really hate to have my favorite character change every year because I really like to get in deep with my playstyle. In order to play competatively I'd have to change characters every time a patch comes out, not because other characters got better, but because my character would've changed and it would be more benefitial to me to simply change characters rather than adjust all of my already existing habits. That could be really aggrivating when you finnally get good with somebody that you liked and they suddenly go changed.

 

[Rune]

Online data-gathering for patches? Neat.. I call upon all Marth players to keep their wii's running at all time, entering random matches and purposely losing to force a Marth buff. \o/

Because my poor old Marth obviously needs a buff.

 

[KratosAurion192]

In order to play competatively I'd have to change characters every time a patch comes out, not because other characters got better, but because my character would've changed and it would be more benefitial to me to simply change characters rather than adjust all of my already existing habits. That could be really aggrivating when you finnally get good with somebody that you liked and they suddenly go changed.

But that's the beauty of it... it makes it so you have to constantly learn, constantly have to adapt. Keeps things interesting in my opinion. I also believe it is a new form of skill... how well can you adapt to the changes? If you can't keep up, if you can't adapt, you can't compete. Adding as much skill to the competitive playing field as possible will truly show who the best players are...
It gives way to experimenting and testing, things that would fall away from the game after a year or two. This experimenting will give way to new tactics and new ways of playing, mabying unlocking potential in moves that would be overlooked otherwise. Mabye then we could have 10 different people playing marth, and all of them using him a different way, with different mindgames AND different attacks...

Does this make sense or am I just feeding you a bunch of bull in your opinion?

 

[Icetrash]

All people do not have a wireless connection or can be bothered moving their Wii close enough to have it wired. I do have wireless so I could get the patch but then if you go to someones house and they dont have it then it will just become stupid.

As much as I would love for it to happen so people will use more characters just not Fox/Falco/Shiek/Marth, I dont wish to see it happen.